Mike Leigh

Interview by Rada Djurica

For the fifth time the Sarajevo Film Festival hosted well-known British film director Mike Leigh. In life as in his films, he likes to keep things real in a very English way. His new film, Happy-Go-Lucky, stars Sally Hawkins as Poppy, and the film revolves around this young woman and her spirited attitude about life. When Leigh began his career, staging plays back in the '60s, he had a "happy-go-lucky" style, which depended very much on the actors involved. Those actor helped him a great deal to build his characters and the story and to improvise. Leigh earned a reputation for dealing with dark subjects through humor, a tendency which runs through his work.

Secrets & Lies, starring Brenda Blethyn, earned him five Oscar nominations in 1997, including Best Director and Best Original Screenplay. For Leigh, it also meant money for other projects. In the ten years since, he has produced five more films, attending the Oscars again in 2005 with the drama Vera Drake. His latest film, Happy-Go-Lucky, features Sally Hawkins as an eternal optimist. Here, Leigh bids good-bye to the melancholy realism of Vera Drake, and instead, does something funny and light. Sally in his film is just too happy! But in a world of misery, often the nicest person is the suspicious one. That is where Poppy stands, always having something clever and witty to say. Our initial suspicion of her joy is finally replaced by respect and a desire to adopt her attitude.

This interview took place at the Sarajevo Film Festival.

The Sarajevo Film Festival seems to be a special festival for you. This is the fifth time that you are here?

It is a special place and there are number of reasons for that. Generally, I think Sarajevo is a unique kind of place. The festival was born out of extraordinary tragedy, and no other festival that I am aware has it. The nature of the city is very energetic, and I find it very enriching, as I am privileged to be part of it, in a very personal way.

The second time when I was here during the retrospective of my movies, I came with two actresses: Katrin Cartlidge and Lesley Manville. Katrin was already very popular here because she made No Man's Land and Before the Rain. People very much remember her. She spent a few days in Sarajevo walking around town, talking to young filmmakers. And she died two weeks later, which was an immense tragedy for all of us in London, but it also resonated with everyone here in Sarajevo, as well. So that's another special personal reason.

To see the festival grow the way I have had the privilege of seeing it, is very interesting. I came here every alternating year from 2000. In the meantime, I've been making films, of course. It is very interesting. Actually, the first couple of times when I was here, there was no red carpet, and the atmosphere was cozy. And then there was a time when I came, I think, in 2006; the red carpet was here and other programs. And I think, "My God, what do they do with Sarajevo Film Fest?" But I was wrong. It was a terribly patronizing, romantic and naïve point of view. This year I came back again, and the festival is really developed and massive. I think the achievement is colossal.

Your latest movie, Happy-Go-Lucky, seems to be totally different from your previous work. Why did you decide to make it?

My natural instinct and job as a director and storyteller is to look at life with all its comedy and tragedy and to look at different things in different ways. So I don't really see it as such a big departure from my previous work. However, I wanted to make a film which is what I call it anti-miserable. We are living in a really disastrous period. People around the globe are destroying each other, which is very unhealthy.

Poppy is a teacher and the nature of her work with children is cherishing the future. In my opinion, it is not possible to nurture the future without being optimistic. So that is what the film is about, on one level. Also, I think it's good to have some fun.

Let me put it in another way. Here is a description of Poppy. She is positive, generous. She has some humor, and she cares about other people. That is also a description of Vera Drake. And that film has lots of warmth, humor, but overall the context is different. So in a way, I do not see Happy-Go-Lucky as a radical departure from my other movies, even it is a bit different.

Was it fun to make a film with such an ebullient central character?

Yes, well, I've enjoyed making all my films. I mean, we had a laugh on Vera Drake! I always make sure to get people on these films, on both sides of the camera, which've got a big sense of humor, because if you have no sense of humor you can't live, really. If you're not sure what I mean, look at the character of Scott. He has such a hard time, because he's got no sense of humor — he's devoid of a sense of humor.

We always have fun, but it's always tough, and it was sure as hell tough making this film. One thing you should realize about the driving lesson in this film is that the actors are actually driving the car. The cars were rigged up for the film, and they had to drive for real at the same time, so that was kind of tough and a bit hairy at times. But yes, it is a lot of fun, and it's great to go to work every day and think that we're doing a job that at some remote point we'll get paid for and it's enjoyable.

It seems that in most of your films, you have strong female characters. Is that intentional?

Well, it seems that way. It is intentional. I certainly have an agenda, a supplementary one: to make good parts for women. In the world of cinematography, women tend to be subordinate to men. My experience in life is that there are strong women around, and I wanted to make a place for them in my work.

Is it tougher for you to make comedy than a tragedy?

I don't really think in those terms. To me, life is comedy and tragedy; life is hilarious and terrible rolled into one. I don't think "I'm doing a comedy now," because it's all the same thing.

You started as a theatre director and playwright writer. Then you worked on TV plays and feature movies. Which of those do you prefer most?

Film is my natural habitant, and the work in the theatre is harder. While making a film, you can make everything and then stick it together; but during the play, actors have to sustain it and perform it well. They have to construct it in a different kind of dynamic. For my own particular kind of work, theatre and film are two sides of the same experience. With film, I try to aspire to the condition of theatre. When you are watching it, you really forget that it is comprised of flat images on the screen, and you get caught by its actuality. With the theatre, I try to put on stage the truthfulness of the cinema and hope that the audience forgets that they are looking at the play.

You are well known for beginning a project without any script. How do actors handle it?

The actors love it. Unlike writing a novel or painting or poetry, film making by definition is a collaborative process, and theatre is a collaborative process, as well. I really decided a long time ago that, since I was concerned with being a writer and directing, I would never want to write things that other people would direct, or indeed direct anything that anybody else had written. Since I am fascinated by the creative possibility of actors, I realized a long time ago that the logical thing to do would be to avoid the terrible process of writing something which only exists in a literary form, on paper, and then trying to find some way of finding the right actor to convert it into an actual reality.

The whole process is about giving empowering and giving creative access to the artist, so that they can do more then just act. They never know who their character is, which makes it possible for them to investigate situations in a completely truthful way. Actors are going into characters by improvising and trying to see the world as a real person does. Making movies in my way is a very creative process for everybody, not just for actors but for designers and cinematographers, as well, since I do not know in advance what the movie will look like. There would be no point for me to do what I do if I knew what it was. I discover what the film is during the journey of making the film.

What do you think of the current situation in the terms of world of cinematography? Do you think that the quality of movies is still at a satisfactory level?

Cinema is a world cinema. Only a tiny number of movies are coming from L.A., and most of them are not very good; or if they are good, it is good in a commercial or technical way. Let's liberate ourselves from the deception that movies are Hollywood and remember that movies are world cinema. There are good movies, more then ever, and they are better than they ever were. And the reason is because of new technology. The access to film making and the tools of film making are more available to more people then they were. And it is very positive.

Anyone that starts being negative about it could only be looking at it in a very commercial or Hollywood-orientated way. The world of cinematography will get even richer, because the barriers are breaking down. People are going to cinemas even in the UK. Strange things are happening in the UK. In the last decade, for the first time ever, for movies in foreign languages with subtitles are to be shown in mainstream cinemas, which is fantastic. So film is an international language, and the cinema of future can only get richer and better.